Evaluation of enemy strength is not an absolute, but a matter of piecing together scraps of reconnaissance and intelligence to form a picture, if possible a picture to fit preconceived theories or to suit the demands of a particular strategy. What a staff makes out of the available evidence depends upon the degree of optimism or pessimism prevailing among them, on what they want to believe or fear to believe, and sometimes upon the sensitivity or intuition of an individual.
Assessing the strength of an enemy is not a straightforward process; it involves gathering and interpreting bits of reconnaissance and intelligence to create a coherent understanding. This understanding often aligns with existing theories or strategic needs. The evaluation process can be heavily influenced by the prevailing mood—whether the staff is feeling optimistic or pessimistic—and their biases toward what they wish to believe or fear.
Moreover, the conclusions drawn may vary depending on the sensitivity or instinct of specific individuals within the staff. The subjective nature of interpretation means that two different teams could assess the same evidence and arrive at contrasting assessments, highlighting the complexities of military intelligence and strategic planning.
